The National Anti-Corruption commissioner, Paul Brereton, removed himself from the process that decided whether the watchdog should pursue individuals referred by the robodebt royal commission due to a “relationship” and “close association” with a person he anticipated would be referred.
Documents released under freedom of information provide the first clues as to the nature of the conflict, which was disclosed but not explained when the Nacc opted not to pursue any of the people referred by the royal commission for potential investigation.
The documents also reveal that, despite opting out of being the decision-maker on robodebt referrals, Brereton asked to retain access to documents relevant to the Nacc’s decision, including requesting no redactions be made to them.
In June 2024 the Nacc said it would not pursue an investigation into six individuals referred by the robodebt royal commission due to separate public service investigations being carried out into five of them.
Brereton delegated the decision not to pursue an investigation to a deputy commissioner “to avoid any possible perception of a conflict of interest”.
Nacc minutes reveal Brereton disclosed this conflict to the deputy commissioners on 3 July 2023, just days after the Nacc commenced operations on 1 July and before the release of the robodebt report on 7 July.
Brereton advised that the robodebt royal commission secretary “was coming to see him on Thursday [6 July]” and proposed that a deputy commissioner “might take carriage” after the Nacc received material from the royal commission.
“It was highly possible he could be conflicted as he knows [redacted] well.
“If [redacted] is the subject of a referral, then he would not be involved in [the] decision concerning [redacted].”
In a sealed chapter, which is yet to be made public, the robodebt royal commissioner Catherine Holmes, referred individuals involved in the “failure of administration” she described as “neither fair nor legal” to agencies including the Nacc.
On 7 July Brereton confirmed he had “a conflict, relating to one of the six individuals the subject of referrals” a person “who is well known to me”.
Brereton indicated he would “not be involved in any decisions” regarding the person but said he retained “an overall interest in the policy questions” arising out of the robodebt royal commission, particularly the scope of “corrupt conduct”.
On 11 August, Brereton disclosed the conflict to the attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, explaining that “[redacted] is one of those with whom I have had a close association”.
On 16 August, Brereton wrote in an email that he would “not be the decision-maker in respect of any of the robodebt matters”.
“However, because it is of obvious important [sic] to the commission, I think it is important and appropriate that I be aware of what is happening.
“I do not think it is necessary to redact any material – it is perfectly normal to receive and read evidence and then not take it into account because it is not admissible etc.”
